3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:00 pm

Obviously the words of a statistics major.

User avatar
oshberg28
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:24 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby oshberg28 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:00 pm

Total Litigator wrote:Canadian Wolf - How bout you actually make YOUR argument. 3.65 163 non-URM with an unextraordinary MBA is not going to get you top 30, and definitely not top 20... I'm sure everyone is wondering what your angle is.


Several applicants on here have been accepted into Top 30 schools with those numbers.

Total Litigator
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Total Litigator » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:01 pm

We don't need to argue about LSN, the published 25th and 75th percentiles, as well as the median LSAT/GPA tell you all you need to know...

User avatar
BrownBears09
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:48 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby BrownBears09 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:lol, offer me something that disproves that statement. I may only have anecdotal evidence, but there is STRONG anecdotal evidence that backs up my point. You just have wishes and dreams, nothing substantial. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that LSN isn't indicative of the average applicants cycle.


Pro tip: Failure to prove an argument is false, does not make said argument true.

Edit: GRAMMAR!
Last edited by BrownBears09 on Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:01 pm

And several TLS applicants in past cycles have shared that LSN & lawschoolpredictor were highly inaccurate for them based on their actual results.

Total Litigator
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Total Litigator » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:02 pm

oshberg28 wrote:
Total Litigator wrote:Canadian Wolf - How bout you actually make YOUR argument. 3.65 163 non-URM with an unextraordinary MBA is not going to get you top 30, and definitely not top 20... I'm sure everyone is wondering what your angle is.


Several applicants on here have been accepted into Top 30 schools with those numbers.


Yeah, and if her softs weren't "I'm white, I have an MBA from a nondescript school, and I am currently unemployed" I might be more forgiving.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:04 pm

Fortunately your degree of "forgiveness" doesn't really affect the reality of the situation.

Total Litigator
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Total Litigator » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:07 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:Fortunately your degree of "forgiveness" doesn't really affect the reality of the situation.


I am pretty sure I just laid out the reality of the situtation pretty well....

thisguy456
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:42 am

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby thisguy456 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:08 pm

BrownBears09 wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:LSN is not comprehensive as it represents only a very small percentage of applicants.

I hate when people make this argument, sure, it's not comprehensive, but it's pretty damn accurate. Sure, OP has a chance at those schools, but that chance is SLIM.


You may "hate" it, but you can't deny the small size of the sample pool. For example, Fordham had 8,843 applications last year. On LSN, Fordham had 536 data points. you're telling me this is "pretty damn accurate?"

I'd say it's pretty damn self selecting, and an average metric at best.


I'm not saying LSN is statistically significant, but you do realize you don't need too many data points to accurately predict an outcome, don't you?

thisguy456
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:42 am

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby thisguy456 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:10 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:My angle ? The OP should apply. According to the above advice, OP should just type his numbers into LSN or lawschoolpredictor.com & abide by that tiny sampling. Why even fill out applications ? If it was that simple, then admissions officers would be replaced by computers & decisions would be instantaneous.


OP didn't ask whether he/she should apply. OP asked whether he/she has a chance.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby FuManChusco » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:12 pm

I genuinely think canadianwolf is a troll

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:15 pm

FuManChusco wrote:I genuinely think canadianwolf is a troll

User avatar
oshberg28
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:24 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby oshberg28 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:15 pm

thisguy456 wrote:
CanadianWolf wrote:My angle ? The OP should apply. According to the above advice, OP should just type his numbers into LSN or lawschoolpredictor.com & abide by that tiny sampling. Why even fill out applications ? If it was that simple, then admissions officers would be replaced by computers & decisions would be instantaneous.


OP didn't ask whether he/she should apply. OP asked whether he/she has a chance.


Thus suggesting that the OP has a chance....come on guys, this isn't that difficult.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Patriot1208 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:40 pm

BrownBears09 wrote:
Patriot1208 wrote:lol, offer me something that disproves that statement. I may only have anecdotal evidence, but there is STRONG anecdotal evidence that backs up my point. You just have wishes and dreams, nothing substantial. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that LSN isn't indicative of the average applicants cycle.


Pro tip: Failure to prove an argument is false, does not make said argument true.

Edit: GRAMMAR!

lol, you aren't that stupid are you? If someone offers evidence for an argument, then you say that evidence is wrong/faulty/etc, then yes, you do have to offer evidence for why their evidence is wrong. You seriously cannot be this dumb.

Also, @oshberg, no one said OP didn't have A chance, everyone said that chance was extremely small.

albanach
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby albanach » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:18 pm

BrownBears09 wrote:You may "hate" it, but you can't deny the small size of the sample pool. For example, Fordham had 8,843 applications last year. On LSN, Fordham had 536 data points. you're telling me this is "pretty damn accurate?"

I'd say it's pretty damn self selecting, and an average metric at best.


If there's no bias to the 536 points, the margin of error is just 4.1%

That's pretty good by most folk's standards.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby d34d9823 » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:55 am

albanach wrote:
BrownBears09 wrote:You may "hate" it, but you can't deny the small size of the sample pool. For example, Fordham had 8,843 applications last year. On LSN, Fordham had 536 data points. you're telling me this is "pretty damn accurate?"

I'd say it's pretty damn self selecting, and an average metric at best.


If there's no bias to the 536 points, the margin of error is just 4.1%

That's pretty good by most folk's standards.

Most people on here (but not all) understand statistics. The argument is usually made more along the lines that people who take the trouble to make a LSN profile are more likely to be basement dwelling losers than your popular, happy-go-lucky, no-LSN profile chaps.

albanach
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby albanach » Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:00 am

d34dluk3 wrote:
albanach wrote:Most people on here (but not all) understand statistics. The argument is usually made more along the lines that people who take the trouble to make a LSN profile are more likely to be basement dwelling losers than your popular, happy-go-lucky, no-LSN profile chaps.


I'm not sure that matters a lot. It's pretty widely accepted that without strong softs, entry is a numbers game. GPA and LSAT. For LSN to be accurate for a candidate without strong softs, all that's required are sufficient data points. >500 is quite sufficient for a reasonably accurate prediction.

The given example was Fordham. LSN has scores of applicants in the range of the OP, and they are almost all rejections. If LSN had no data in the range, its accuracy could be questioned but, at least for Fordham, that's not the case. Unless you're suggesting there's a bias that causes more folk rejected to record this than those who get an acceptance thus skewing the numbers? If anything I'd expect it to be the other way - people are far more likely to record success than failure and consequently, LSN may give an over-positive outlook for an applicant.

So, unless the OP has some significant softs that we don't yet know about, I'd go with the statistical evidence we do have and suggest retaking the LSAT.

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby whymeohgodno » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:49 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:And several TLS applicants in past cycles have shared that LSN & lawschoolpredictor were highly inaccurate for them based on their actual results.


Yeah and I'm willing to bet these people were either splitters/reverse splitters or URMs.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:52 pm

The ones that I recall were not splitters or URMs which is what made them noteworthy. You can research this on this site.

Total Litigator
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Total Litigator » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:05 pm

Canadian Wolf. what are you talking about. seriously. just admit your argument is sh**ty and makes close to no sense. Have you ever even applied to law schools before?
I like to think I have above average softs. I am a nonsplitter nonURM who was admitted at the most of the schools within my number range, waitlisted at schools that were slightly beyond my numbers, and rejected at all schools where I was substantially below median. That is a pretty standard experience. You have a screwy view of law school admissions where administrators decide to admit subpar applicants on a whim.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:09 pm

Exactly how I view your arguments. Interesting that many young adults like absolutes & simplicity in a process which is neither, yet, after law school, often tend to overcomplicate matters (feel compelled to write everything they know about a legal topic in their filings) during their first several years of practicing law.

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby Patriot1208 » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:12 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:Exactly how I view your arguments. Interesting that many young adults like absolutes & simplicity in a process which is neither, yet, after law school, often tend to overcomplicate matters (feel compelled to write everything they know about a legal topic in their filings) during their first several years of practicing law.


Except, you haven't actually been able to make an argument. You have offered no evidence in support of your viewpoint. No one said that there aren't outliers, no one said that it is infallable, but LSN is right for the vast majority of applicants. Until there is any evidence against it, the strong anecdotal evidence suggesting it is right for most applicants will win out.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby d34d9823 » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:16 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:Exactly how I view your arguments. Interesting that many young adults like absolutes & simplicity in a process which is neither, yet, after law school, often tend to overcomplicate matters (feel compelled to write everything they know about a legal topic in their filings) during their first several years of practicing law.

Dude, spouting platitudes and unsourced anecdotes is really not that convincing.

CanadianWolf
Posts: 10439
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby CanadianWolf » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:21 pm

Yes, the OP has a chance. LSN & lawschoolpredictor are small, random samplings. Admissions officers do more than simply look at LSAT scores & GPAs.

whymeohgodno
Posts: 2508
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: 3.85 gpa for MBA, 3.65 gpa B.S in Business, 163 LSAT

Postby whymeohgodno » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:25 pm

CanadianWolf wrote:Yes, the OP has a chance. LSN & lawschoolpredictor are small, random samplings. Admissions officers do more than simply look at LSAT scores & GPAs.


Are you stupid? LSN isn't random sampling which is it's main fault. Never talk again.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests